The Tannenbaum Dilemma

The belief of Anthropomorphic Global Warming (AGW) has divided those believers into two parts. In either part, there is this acceptance that collectively the human race is collectively destroying the life-system it relies on. Not too much like what yeast does to a closed brewery factory. The yeast produces alcohol as a bi-product and later the same alcohol sterilizes the container. To the yeast they cause a self-genocide.

Like a yeast organism is more successful if it uses more energy. A human being is more successful if he/she/(zhe?) has more access to money. And most jobs requires you to drive to work in many places we either have to participate in this, or others will. So, we might as well participate.

In order to do good, you have to do well. But in order to do well, you need to produce carbon dioxide (CO₂) and a lot of it. So now, with this acceptance, you can be a low-energy person who has economic hardship or a high-energy person which disposable income. Which do you choose? In the former case, CO₂ producing activities are sent elsewhere which is just any economic activity, so you are lead to a pro-world-government, pro-abortion, anti-bitcoin, anti-freedom and anti-human, kind of thinking. For many that is where we are. In the later case, we should no longer worry about any pollution, including dioxins, cancerous chemicals, and radio-activity. After all, they believe they are going to destroy our world anyway.